Then we get good news like this...

[MaxPF]

Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at salt Lake grocery store

So many of these stories go unreported. It's good when the media shows that lawfully armed citizens are A Good Thing™. It also shows the fallacy of the anti-gunners argument that bad guys can't go on bloody rampages if they can't get guns.

I also have to commend the armed citizen in this case for his restraint. He would have been well within his rights to shoot the guy with the knife, but instead chose to hold his fire and told they perp to drop it. The event was resolved with no further bloodshed, which is in stark contrast to all the anti-gun-nuts who, when CCW laws were passed, claimed there would be "blood running in the streets" with every minor argument :roll:

 

[HUMMER INVESTMENTS]

I have high garditude for the man with the gun. Glad to see something in the news about how people protect themselves and others with concealed weapons.

 

[Green 1]

Most if not all that do carry have no desire to pull the trigger. The idea behind having a weapon is to deter a criminal and stop him if there are no options. The more that carry and the more it is embrased by buisnesses the less criminal activity for fear of the gun toting public.

 

[3Hummers]

Love it

 

[twinmill28]

Sorry, I think differently--I'd have shot his sorry ass. The anti-gun nuts would have a hey-day if it were me........

I believe in shortening the lengthy process of these ass clowns getting a chance to go to court and have his crooked lawyer claim how the guy didn't get hugged when he was a kid. The thing that really cooks my bacon is how the newspapers have to report it as "the suspect is accused of"---accused my butt, we know HE DID IT!

 

[Scarsman]

Sorry, I think differently--I'd have shot his sorry ass.

Agreed! If you have ever seen up close and personal what a knife can do in a matter of milliseconds, even by someone who has been shot already, you would not want to be within 30 feet of a committed person with a knife. Even if you already had your gun in your hand. A knife can cause more injury than any handgun round!

 

[Scarsman]

Now, if they had a background check and a 5 day waiting period on purchasing knives, this could have been prevented!

 

[[__--MUD--__]]

If he would of just shot him in the leg to disable him, that ******* would of sued him- and the ****ed up way this country is now...probably would of won his civil case for damages.

 

[twinmill28]

My wife is always saying "you could just shoot them in their leg". That's some Hollywood hero BS---22 years of M-16 and M-9 training says aim for center of mass and take into consideration whats behind your target.
Your statement to whoever asks/investigates is that you were fearing for yours or your family's life and safety.

22 years of training also says that if some crazy ****er is threatening to take my life, I've got absolutely no problem eliminating the threat.
I know, there would be all kinds of lawsuits if that ever came to fruition, but that will be the last thing on my mind at the time.

 

[Green 1]

Guy's I feel the same way. I guess too many years in the corporate world and I give the politically correct answer. I shoot almost every day here at the house and I shoot at the center of the target.

 

[[__--MUD--__]]

When I went through my CCW class, the instructor made a point. Dont ever pull out your weapon unless you or your families life is in danger. If you do, you shoot to kill...a dead person can't sue you. The instructor was a cop.

 

[MaxPF]

When I went through my CCW class, the instructor made a point. Dont ever pull out your weapon unless you or your families life is in danger. If you do, you shoot to kill...a dead person can't sue you. The instructor was a cop.

You don't shoot to kill. You shoot to stop the threat. Which means shooting center mass. If the choirboy you plug happens to die from his wounds, tough ****. You NEVER shoot to wound - a bullet is not a remote control punch, and very few people (even trained operators) can make an accurate wounding shot in the heat of battle. Furthermore, a wounding shot may not stop the guy, and you could still wind up dead. On top of that, a shot to, say, the leg, could sever the BG's femoral artery. He could still kill you, then end up dying himself from blood loss. Like twinmill says, shoot-to-wound is Hollywood bull**** that never happens in real life. So is the "warning shot". If someone is threatening your life, you shoot 'em. If not, the gun stays silent.

 

[Dennis]

You don't shoot to kill. You shoot to stop the threat.

Right on brother!

a wounding shot may not stop the guy, and you could still wind up dead. On top of that, a shot to, say, the leg, could sever the BG's femoral artery. .

In cases like this..I would first ask the perp. to kindly move over and stand on the tile floor...because I don't want all the blood he's gonna leak to get on my carpet....I'm that way:au3:.

 

[Steve #1]

The only time I would shoot someone in the leg would be when I was off on my groin shot.